Thursday, May 21, 2009
RAMMING THROUGH THE RMA CHANGES
I believe the changes introduced by the Resource Management (Simplifying and Streamlining) Amendment Bill appears to make it easier for developers to do whatever they like and harder for the community to be involved. There is already huge frustration in local communities about how hard it is to participate in city planning matters. The bill will make that worse by reducing the notification requirements and by putting barriers in place such as security of costs.
The concern is that many in the community are unaware of the changes. It real terms if the bill becomes law, it basically it means much much easier for things like: big orange blobs next to nature reserves, ugly skyscrapers along the coast, and low quality high density housing projects that destroy local neighbourhoods. The irony of course is that these things are happening already.
I agree it’s time the RMA was changed, but it should be to offer better protection for the environment rather than reduce it. You can find the Governments view at www.mfe.govt.nz/rma/central/amendments/
Nz Music Month. Yay for May!
Monday, March 9, 2009
The LTCCP. Meh, What a Mouthful!
The LTCCP. This jargon stands for the Long Term Council Community Plan. In short this is the most important document that Council produces and is only done once every three years. It tells you how Council will spend the money over the next 10 years on a variety of things from expensive capital works projects (tram extensions, new swimming pools and libraries, etc) to the operational levels of service (eg how often your street gets cleaned, what hours libraries and swimming pools are open, etc etc).
One item of concern in the draft LTCCP to me is the Council raising of on street car parking charges from $2.60 to $2.90 per hour. It is pure revenue raising and far too steep an increase for my liking. I’m all for public transport and alternative methods of getting to school and work but driving people out of the central city when they can park at malls for free seems like madness to me.
This really is the bible of Council spending over the next 10 years and as such it is important you make you views known on the draft version. Comment on what you like and what you don’t and also don’t be afraid to raise things that aren’t mentioned. Often in these documents it is what is not put in that is key. The draft version will be available from March 10th – April 16th for public submissions. (There will also be public meetings also which you can attend to learn more). Check the website for details. www.ccc.govt.nz/ltccp.
Final message. I was fortunate to see Obama be sworn in as president in the
motivated. A key theme to his speeches was that it is not up to someone else to sort out our problems, but that it is up to all of us to do what we can for our communities and our societies to find solutions. Everyone is important and everyone needs to be involved. Choice.
Monday, April 28, 2008
Council Abandons Historic Aidanfield Farm Buildings
According to the Council's own report:

"The St John of God (Mount Magdala) Farm buildings in their current form have high regional and moderate national heritage significance and therefore should be considered with the Deans’ farm buildings to be the most significant heritage farm buildings remaining in Christchurch."
This is sad. This is the Council abandoning an important part of our local history and heritage. It constantly amazes me how easily some greedy developers can conduct cultural terrorism by holding heritage buildings hostage. They then demand excessive amounts of money from a public body in order to secure their safety.

Of course if Council had a stronger heritage policy and City Plan then perhaps this would not be so easy to do. It is totally time to enhance the City Plan and provide better mechanisms for saving our heritage. I want my grandchildren to enjoy what makes Christchurch and Canterbury unique. I want them to be able to experience first hand the feelings of seeing and touching our history.
This was the first true test of the new Council's committment to protecting heritage. Unfortunately it did not pass.
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
City Councillors Left High and Dry: Mayor Seeks Delay of Controversial Central Plains Water Report
Councillors were advised today by Tony Marryatt (Chief Executive of the Christchurch City Council) that a delay of the urgent report (requested by February 2008) into the controversial Central Plains Water Limited loan was sought by the Mayor until May because he was away and wishes to participate in the debate. This is despite the fact that the Mayor unsuccessfully voted to stop the report being written in the first place. It should be further noted that he was available in February when the report was originally due to come back.
I have previously welcomed the Christchurch City Council's decision to seek a report on options for an independent review of the issues surrounding the controversial Central Plains Water Limited loan from Dairy Holdings Limited.
The call for a report followed the Council's vote on December 13th 2007 to not accept the Central Plains Water Trust Annual Report or the City Council's staff report written to address concerns of the Malvern Hills Protection Society deputation on November 7th 2007.
I find it extraordinary that this matter has been able to be delayed when a majority of City Councillors have expressed such significant concern. This is an important and urgent issue for the people of Christchurch and delaying the report back to Council by three months (February to May) is simply outrageous and unacceptable.
As a Councillor I expect Council resolutions to be acted on in a timely fashion and not be deferred because of an overseas trip by the Mayor. This raises a scary precedent for the powers of a Mayor when he can override a decision made by the majority of Council. I will be writing to the Chief Executive expressing my concern and seeking the report that was due in February to be put on the next Council agenda for 24 April 2008.
The Central Plains Water Scheme is a hugely controversial project. Since my election to Council there have been numerous deputations made regarding concern at details of the DHL loan. I believe there are valid questions which need to be addressed. The biggest question is the potential for a private dairy company (Dairy Holdings Limited) to gain the rights to resource consents (if granted) for a scheme that was initially set up for the public good. I would be very concerned if the loan agreement in any way enabled the loss of resource consents from public ownership. The purpose of receiving the requested report was to get answers to fundamental questions that could threaten the very purpose of the Central Plains Water Scheme.
Supporting information: resolution from Council Meeting (December 20th, 2007)
That staff report to the February 2008 Council meeting on the options available to the Council, to conduct an independent review including a second legal opinion on the matters raised by the Malvern Hills Protection Society, addressing specifically the cost, timing, scope and implications of conducting such a review.
